Was Capt Kirk a "BAD" guy?

[RobertScorpio]

Sometimes, when I watch TNG, I get the over all impression that TNG's era of Starfleet/Federation became so 'politically correct' because of the actions of one person, and one person alone..JAMES T KIRK.

How many times do we hear Picard and company say things, to the affect, "we don't do things like that anymore because we have learned that.." blah blah blah. And when I think what 'lesson' they are alluding to I can only think of one name; James T Kirk. It is almost as if Roddenberry created this PC world of TNG-era trek to undo the damage that Kirk (Gene L Coon actually, if you think about it) did to the so called 'goody two shoe' policies of the Federation.

Well, I say, HOOEY!!! The 'pc' nature of TNG is what now, years later after TNG left the air, I find issue with when I watch TNG now. Picard comes off subtlely preachy about Kirk's era. Well, Jean-Luc, you know what? Sometimes you aren't as 'right' as you think you are. I'll take Kirk's shredding the Prime Directive to save lives over your following the rules any day of the week!

Rob

 

[cultcross]

Sometimes, when I watch TNG, I get the over all impression that TNG's era of Starfleet/Federation became so 'politically correct' because of the actions of one person, and one person alone..JAMES T KIRK.

How many times do we hear Picard and company say things, to the affect, "we don't do things like that anymore because we have learned that.." blah blah blah. And when I think what 'lesson' they are alluding to I can only think of one name; James T Kirk. It is almost as if Roddenberry created this PC world of TNG-era trek to undo the damage that Kirk (Gene L Coon actually, if you think about it) did to the so called 'goody two shoe' policies of the Federation.

What GAVE you that IMPRESSION?

 

[idreamedmusic]

RobertScorpio, I agree about your "HOOEY!!!" part. That is actually part of why I am enjoying TNG less and less the more I watch it now. This über-PC, my way or the highway type of Starfleet that we got with Picard and co is starting to grate big time.

So, no, I don't and cannot see Kirk as anything approaching a bad guy. If anything, he was more faceted, willing to accept that they had a long way to go and flawed - all of which makes for a well-rounded and more believable character in my book. Sure he made some mistakes if you want (A Privat Little War, for example, though even that's debatable), but he never pretended to be perfect and actually was shown agonizing about some of his decisions.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Sometimes, when I watch TNG, I get the over all impression that TNG's era of Starfleet/Federation became so 'politically correct' because of the actions of one person, and one person alone..JAMES T KIRK.

How many times do we hear Picard and company say things, to the affect, "we don't do things like that anymore because we have learned that.." blah blah blah. And when I think what 'lesson' they are alluding to I can only think of one name; James T Kirk. It is almost as if Roddenberry created this PC world of TNG-era trek to undo the damage that Kirk (Gene L Coon actually, if you think about it) did to the so called 'goody two shoe' policies of the Federation.

What GAVE you that IMPRESSION?

Look no further than episode Spock met Picard. Picard is pretty much there to give spock a dressing down for his actions. "Cowboy" diplomacy, as Picard called it. Spock just bitch slaps Picard and tells him, shut up you mamzie-panzie! Grow some balls!!! It is good to see that Kirk had as much effect on Spock!

Rob

 

[TheLonelySquire]

Basically, James Tiberius Kirk was a leader and a Captain. Picard was a chair bound paper pusher and a diplomat.

 

[ktanner3]

Sometimes, when I watch TNG, I get the over all impression that TNG's era of Starfleet/Federation became so 'politically correct' because of the actions of one person, and one person alone..JAMES T KIRK.

How many times do we hear Picard and company say things, to the affect, "we don't do things like that anymore because we have learned that.." blah blah blah. And when I think what 'lesson' they are alluding to I can only think of one name; James T Kirk. It is almost as if Roddenberry created this PC world of TNG-era trek to undo the damage that Kirk (Gene L Coon actually, if you think about it) did to the so called 'goody two shoe' policies of the Federation.

Well, I say, HOOEY!!! The 'pc' nature of TNG is what now, years later after TNG left the air, I find issue with when I watch TNG now. Picard comes off subtlely preachy about Kirk's era. Well, Jean-Luc, you know what? Sometimes you aren't as 'right' as you think you are. I'll take Kirk's shredding the Prime Directive to save lives over your following the rules any day of the week!

Rob

I agree that the Prime Directive is sometimes ridiculous. Kirk wasn't a bad captain.(Thou you could make a case that he was played by a bad actor.)

 

[misskim86]

He was a 100% good guy, he did what was right not what was 'politically' correct, and he was always there for his friends

 

[blaXXer]

Of course KIRK was a BAD guy. He violated countless alien SEX SLAVES for his own pleasure, and, quite possibly one TRIBBLE.

 

[Takomaguy]

Captain Kirk wasn't bad but he really needed counseling. Jimmy never got over the murder of his parents. As a child, he took his parents death as some sort of message that they didn't want him, or didn't want be around him.

As a consequence he busted his ass to prove himself worthy. He was always seeking approval of authority figures. He was evn trying to suck up to Garth! At the academy, he became a stack of legs with books. He became a neat freak. Remmeber the way he busted Cogley's balls for having the nerve to bring in volumes of court reporters to find case law to SAVE HIS ASS!

He pushed himself to be part of the establishment. If not the youngest captain in Starfleet history he was certainly one of the youngest. And when he made captain, it still wasn't enough. He took another major psy hit when he lost his brother.

He was angry but he didn't know whom to strike. He chose the Kilingons and himself. He purposely put himself into situations in which he could have been killed... as well as everyone around him. Stupid bastard takes a Vulcan down to a nazi planet?!?!? Garth wouldn't have pulled a stunt like that and his was as crazy as a shithouse rat!

And every time he had a chance to pop a Klingon, look out!

He didn't really come to grips with himself until he retired. That's when he really wanted to die. He believed that he had wasted his entire life. That's the reason why he went to fix the problem on Harriman's ship. He went because he wanted to die.

What a surprise when he found out he wasn't dead, but in the Matrix, well at least in A Matrix.

Now he's happy. Kirk now has the chance to live a life. Then Frenchie comes along. Pulls him on one last mission. NOW Kirk really wanted to live. TFB. Add insult to injury, how does he die? Getting shot in the back by that old droog Alex, now a senior citizen.

Naaaaw, not bad. He just needed counseling. Maybe he would have seen that the whole universe was not about him, and he could have cooled the phuck out. Maybe married one of those girls he was always doing, settled down, had a few kids. If he had just grown up and shown some phucikng maturity, there is no limit to what he could have accomplished. Maybe instead of strutting around all he time, he could have become the Commandant of the Acadamy and with his experience, nutured an entire generation of effective Starfleet leadership.

It's like my grand uncle used to always say, "If you're not married, the only time you need to take it out your pants is when your going to the bathroom."

Yeah, Mccoy should have given him some adderall and perscribed some counseling back at SFO. Spock could have taken over. Then when Kirk got himself together, he minght not have been the menace the guys in Temporal said he was.

 

[Keith1701]

Basically, James Tiberius Kirk was a leader and a Captain. Picard was a chair bound paper pusher and a diplomat.

Kirk was still a good guy and Captain.

 

[Takomaguy]

Basically, James Tiberius Kirk was a leader and a Captain. Picard was a chair bound paper pusher and a diplomat.

Kirk was still a good guy and Captain.

Maybe, but Locke said he was a piss poor Captain.

 

[Bak_and_Blue]

Captain Kirk wasn't bad but he really needed counseling. Jimmy never got over the murder of his parents. As a child, he took his parents death as some sort of message that they didn't want him, or didn't want be around him.

Are we talking about James T. Kirk or Batman?

Locke said he was piss poor but look what he did to poor Boone.

Kirk was a great captain.

 

[Takomaguy]

Captain Kirk wasn't bad but he really needed counseling. Jimmy never got over the murder of his parents. As a child, he took his parents death as some sort of message that they didn't want him, or didn't want be around him.

Are we talking about James T. Kirk or Batman?

Locke said he was piss poor but look what he did to poor Boone.

Kirk was a great captain.

Oh no, I'm talking about James T. Kirk. Remmeber Kodos(sp.?) the executioner?

Listen, I grew up on TOS. I'm not hating on Jimmy-boy. But, he was an okay Captain. He could have been a great Federation leader.

Like I said, he needed counseling.

Oh, and what happened to Boone was really fucked up worse than his sister.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Sometimes, when I watch TNG, I get the over all impression that TNG's era of Starfleet/Federation became so 'politically correct' because of the actions of one person, and one person alone..JAMES T KIRK.

No, it was just societal trends overall. Kirk was a product of his times and has nothing to apologize for.

 

[Zanten]

I think comparing Kirk and Picard is a bit difficult, considering they came from two different eras; Kirk's Enterprise was usually beyond rapid, easy contact with Starfleet command, which meant that her Captain was given a great deal more power when it came to decision-making, especially since there were only, what, a little over a dozen Constitution class starships commissioned? It was rare that you would see much in the way of a Starfleet, well, fleet, except in the near-war with the Klingons.

Picard's universe, on the other hand, was much more structured, with a larger fleet to rely upon for support, and it was much easier to communicate with the higher-ups. Because of this, less power was given to Captains, since they no longer had the excuse of being beyond Federation jurisdiction. 'Cowboy Diplomacy' would have been impressive to see, of course, but unlike Kirk, it's unlikely a Captain who relied upon it on a regular basis would remain a Captain for very long.

As Temis stated, Kirk is a product of his times, but so is Picard.

 

[Danoz]

Basically, James Tiberius Kirk was a leader and a Captain. Picard was a chair bound paper pusher and a diplomat.

Nobody ever examines this correctly. James Tiberius Kirk was a soldier. Picard was a diplomat and a scholar. Both were proficient at both, but they had their strengths.

Picard was better

 

[Zanten]

Exactly, Danoz. ^_^ The difference between them is even reflected in their ships; Kirk's Enterprise, while having some labs and basic recreation facilities, was still relatively spartan in its construction and design, and its occupants were solely scientists, security, engineers, doctors, and operators. It's also likely that the Enterprise's weapon and defense systems comprised a greater percentage of her total energy cost and space allocation.

Picard's ship had many laboratories, some quite extensive, was designed to be modular so that new facilities could be added. Recreation facilities bordered on luxurious, as were crew quarters; a greater percentage of the crew wasn't just Starfleet officers, but also civilian scientists, families, etc, and despite the Enterprise's advanced defenses and weapons systems, it's unlikely that her armaments and shielding represented as high a percentage of total ship-space as the original Enterprise; you could have packed in a lot more torpedoes launchers and phaser arrays if you shaved off the rec facilities, additional crew quarters, etc.

Kirk had to be a Starship Captain. Picard had to be mayor of a town.

 

[Shaw]

And when I think what 'lesson' they are alluding to I can only think of one name; James T Kirk.

One has to wonder though... when you think of anything, don't you always think of one of two names; James T Kirk or William Shatner.

I had never assumed that TNG was referencing Kirk at those moments, but then again, I rarely think of Kirk out side of where he is the subject of a story. It would never occur to me to inject him into everything Trek anymore than I would feel the need to inject either Kennedy or Nixon into everything political.

What is even more interesting is seeing people defend a character by attacking another. Is the only way to defend the Kirk character to attack a different character (like Picard, Sisko or Janeway)? When I see people doing things like that, it pretty much leads me to believe that they are resorting to that tactic because what they want to defend is pretty much indefensible (or at least outside of their abilities to put forward a proper defense).

 

[Zanten]

I hadn't meant my comment as an attack on Kirk; I like him just as much as Picard, and think both of them to be fine Captains, just for different reasons in different worlds.

 

[Sector 7]

It IS difficult NOT to compare captains. We all have our favorites. I do, however, agree that each captain is a product of their respective times and cultures.
In Kirk's time, Cowboy Diplomacy was a product of few ships, a smaller (but growing) Federation, walking into ongoing disputes or wars. Space was the final frontier. Imposing one's own values on another civilization was forbidden by bureaucrats way back in the Federation. They didn't have to deal with the results their policies on the frontier until long after the field decisions had been made.
In Picard's time, rule of government was well more established. Ambassadors were more numerous. Disputes were usually handled by diplomats, many of whom were also starship captains. The bureaucracy was well in place to handle situations. Out of necessity, captains were indeed 'paper pushers' compared to captains of the old way. Perhaps those captains viewed their predecessors as "relics of an age best forgotten". But I also believe they sometimes envied those same relics. They were men who saw real action and made new policy instead of enforcing the status quo.
Who is better? It depends on the context in which one views each captain.
TNG was preachy because of its context.
TOS was action because of its context.
IMHO.